All posts by srcoutts

Mapping Precarity in the Contemporary Global Context

We are glad to invite you to an Oxford Brookes University-based interdisciplinary symposium on the issue of Precarity. Location: Oxford Brookes University, Headington Hall, Green Room Date: 2nd of March 2020, from 2:30 pm to 6:30 pm. This symposium is meant to open a discussion on this particular topic from different disciplinary angles, with the purpose of observing how the notion of Precarity goes far beyond a circumscribed political and economic definition, to become, instead, a key tool to understand contemporary social dynamics. For this reason, the symposium will include the contribution of researchers and academics operating in very heterogeneous fields with the purpose of mapping the complex and manifold nature of Precarity.

List of the participants/speakers:

Dr. Tamsin Barber Senior Lecturer in Sociology; Department of Social Sciences Paper: Vietnamese migrants in the UK; victims or agents in the global neoliberal capitalist economy?

Dr. Jason Danely Senior Lecturer in Anthropology of Japan; Department of Social Sciences Paper: Ageing and Precarity

Dr. Lucy Ford Senior Lecturer in International Relations; Department of Social Sciences Paper: Precarity and the global ecological crisis

Dr. Tina Managhan Senior Lecturer in International Relations; Department of Social Sciences Paper: The Pleasures of Risk: Unknowing the ‘War on Terror.’

Prof. Simonetta Manfredi Associate Dean for Research Knowledge and Exchange; Business School-Executive Office

Dr. Mel Nowicki Senior Lecturer in Urban Geography; Department of Social Sciences Paper: Bringing Home the Housing Crisis: Domicide and Precarity in London and Dublin

Dr. Francesco Sticchi Associate Lecturer in Film and Media Studies; School of Arts Paper: Precarity in Contemporary Cinema and Television

Dr. Suke Wolton Lecturer in Politics at Oxford University, Regents College; Postgraduate Candidate at Oxford Brookes University; School of Arts Paper: The ‘regents@work’ project and what it might discover

For further information please contact:

Florence Application deadline: Apr 5, 2020 Robert Klein Fellowships 2021

The Institut national d’histoire de l’art and the Villa Finaly in partnership with the Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz – Max-Planck-Institut, announce a call for applications for the selection of 2021 Robert Klein fellows.

For the third consecutive year, the Institut national d’histoire de l’art, the Villa Finaly and the Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz – Max-Planck-Institut will award two postdoctoral grants to researchers requiring access to Florentine institutions. These grants are intended for researchers in art history, French or foreign, who wish to carry out research in Florentine archives or libraries. Applicants must hold a doctoral degree or be conservateurs du patrimoine. The grant amounts to € 3,000. Awardees are housed at Villa Finaly for a period to be determined (participation costs are € 25 per day for maintenance, in addition to the city tax of € 3 per night and per person within the limit of 7 consecutive nights). The Villa can only receive scholarship holders between January 7 and March 31 or between November 1 and December 15.

Selection committee The selection committee consists of a representative of the INHA, a representative of the Villa Finaly, a member from the Universités de Paris (the Villa Finaly is the property of the Universités de Paris), a representative of the Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz and of an external scholar chosen jointly and by mutual agreement. The committee meets once a year to choose the awardees for the following year.

Application documents Applications for the 2021 selection must be submitted online on the INHA platform ( no later than April 5, 2020 before midnight (CET). Only applications submitted online on the INHA platform will be considered.

The file (in French or in English) must include:

1. A letter of application addressed to the director general of the INHA and to the director of the Villa Finaly

2. A curriculum vitae

3. A detailed work program (4 pages maximum) in French or English including:

– A general presentation of the research;

– The particular subject requiring the candidate’s presence in Florence;

– The research institutions where the documentation and archives that will be visited are located;

– Proposals for how this research might be diffused through a conference, a seminar, the establishment of a partnership with research institutions on site or elsewhere, will be particularly appreciated.

4. A recommendation letter by an established scholar in support of the application.

5. The completed information sheet ( Robert Klein.doc).

Contact For more information, please contact the Secrétariat of the Département des études et de la recherche of the INHA at +33 (0)1 47 03 85 81 or via e-mail:

Bourses Robert Klein 2021

L’Institut national d’histoire de l’art et la Villa Finaly en partenariat avec le Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz – Max-Planck-Institut, ouvrent l’appel à candidature pour la sélection des boursiers Robert Klein 2021.

Pour la troisième année consécutive, l’Institut national d’histoire de l’art, la Villa Finaly et le Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz – Max-Planck-Institut vont attribuer deux bourses de recherches de niveau postdoctoral nécessitant l’accès aux institutions florentines.

Ces bourses sont destinées aux chercheurs en histoire de l’art, français ou étrangers, souhaitant se rendre à Florence pour y effectuer une recherche dans les institutions locales. Les candidats doivent être titulaires d’un doctorat ou être conservateurs du patrimoine.

Le montant de la bourse, revalorisée en 2019, s’élève à 3000 €. Les lauréats sont logés à la Villa Finaly pour une durée à déterminer (participation de 25 € par jour au titre des frais d’entretien, en sus de la taxe de séjour de la ville de 3€ par nuit et par personne dans une limite de 7 nuitées consécutives). La Villa ne peut recevoir les boursiers qu’entre le 7 janvier et le 31 mars ou entre le 1er novembre et le 15 décembre.

Commission de sélection La commission de sélection est composée d’un représentant de l’INHA, d’un représentant de la Villa Finaly, d’un membre en provenance des Universités de Paris (la Villa Finaly est la propriété des universités de Paris), d’un représentant du Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz et d’une personnalité extérieure choisie conjointement et d’un commun accord. La commission se réunit une fois par an pour choisir les lauréats de l’année suivante.

Dossier de candidature Les dossiers de candidature pour la sélection 2021 doivent être déposés en ligne sur la plateforme de l’INHA ( au plus tard le 5 avril 2020 avant minuit. Seules les candidatures déposées en ligne sur la plateforme de l’INHA seront prises en compte.

Le dossier (en français ou en anglais) doit comprendre :

1. Une lettre de candidature adressée au directeur général de l’INHA et à la directrice de la Villa Finaly

2. Un curriculum vitae

3. Un programme de travail détaillé (4 pages maximum) en langue française ou anglaise comprenant:

– une présentation générale de la recherche;

– le sujet particulier nécessitant la présence du candidat à Florence;

– les institutions de recherche où se trouvent la documentation et les archives à consulter;

– un développement concernant la valorisation de cette recherche par le biais d’une conférence, d’un séminaire, l’établissement d’un partenariat avec des institutions de recherche sur place ou ailleurs, sera, particulièrement apprécié.

4. Une attestation d’une personnalité scientifique appuyant la candidature.

5. La fiche de renseignements dûment remplie ( Robert Klein.doc?download=true).

Contacts Pour plus d’informations, contactez le secrétariat du Département des études et de la recherche de l’INHA au 01 47 03 85 81 ou à l’adresse

FURTHER INFORMATION Web: Newsletter: Facebook: Twitter: Video:

Call for Papers: Deleuze & Guattari and the Economy

Thursday, 14th of May 2020 in Rotterdam

‘What do Deleuze and Guattari have to say about economics and the economy? After the last financial crisis — and in expectation of the next ? issues concerning financialisation, mounting debts, fluctuating markets, and inequality remain as vexing as they were in the 70s and 80s. While Deleuze & Guattari might have hesitated to speak of ?the? economy, there can be little doubt that they would have much to say to the discursive formation that does employ this substantive. The argument raised in Anti-Oedipus against an economy isolated from material, affective, moral and political orders remains valid and valuable today and many strains of their analysis are echoed in contemporary developments (cryptocurrencies, precarisation, the issue of debt).

It is for this reason that we welcome abstracts of 500 words on the relation of the oeuvre of Deleuze and Guattari to the issue of ?the economy?. The deadline is the 15th of March, 2020. Topic suggestions include:

? The role — or roles — of money in Anti-Oedipus, A Thousand Plateaus or other works

? The distinction theft/gift/debt and exchange

? The relation between finance and desire, affects and morality

? Deterritorialisation, markets and financialisation

? The relation between markets and the State

? Analysis of contemporary developments such as the debt crisis, cashless economy,

cryptocurrencies, etc.?

Abstracts may be sent to ?

Control Shift: Call Out.

Propose an artwork, workshop or provocation Work with us. Join the Control Shift Network

Control Shift is a new media arts programme coming to Bristol (UK) in June 2020 exploring creative and critical approaches to technology, rooted in embodiment and materiality.

We are looking for artworks, workshops, and provocations from local and international contributors.

Fees up to £500 plus additional production budget, travel, expenses and access bursaries.

How to apply: To apply please follow our online call. Deadline is March 15th.

Contact: If you would like any further information about this project or have any questions, please contact Martha King

Deadline extended: March 1st, 2020 5th Spiral Film and Philosophy Conference “Interruptions” Toronto, Canada, May 8-9, 2020

In a recent essay examining the imperial legacy of the camera, Teju Cole writes of the camera as a weapon: “When we speak of ‘shooting’ with a camera, we are acknowledging the kinship of photography and violence.” Three decades earlier, Toni Morrison asserted in her Nobel Lecture: “Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge.” Both propositions share the same ideas, yet they demand further examination. Cole’s comment on the relationship between photography and violence was made by a practitioner of photography. Morrison’s observation on the relationship between language and violence was brought to our attention by a novelist. In each case, the writer focusses on the material and social issues intrinsic to the use of a specific medium of expression. Refusing to look past the material and social conditions of expression, these two interventions allow us to imagine and to explore new, subversive paths of creation and criticism. It not a coincidence that Cole’s first essay on photography is entirely informed by the concept of the blind spot. And it is not a coincidence that Morrison’s speech, too, invokes a conjunction of blindness and knowledge: “Once upon a time there was an old woman. Blind. Wise.” In each case, the creation of images and thoughts stems from a joyous failure to comply and an imaginative refusal to go along. The work of art conjured in this process is one of generative interruption. In his study of the black radical tradition in poetry and music, In the Break, furthermore, Fred Moten has written of the interruptive power of such a poetics: “The history of blackness is testament to the fact that objects can and do resist. Blackness — the extended movement of a specific upheaval, an ongoing irruption that anarranges every line — is a strain that pressures the assumption of the equivalence of personhood and subjectivity.” Moten’s notion of “anarrangment” speaks here to the simultaneously disruptive and productive potential of paying attention to the social and material conditions of aesthetic forms and the radical potentiality inside aesthetic responses to such conditions.

Both film and philosophy have participated and still participate in sustaining systemic oppression. This has taken both overt and covert forms of violence and exclusion — each perpetuating the policing of what counts as compelling questions to ask, what forms of knowledge matter, who is heard and seen, and under what conditions and where a subject can appear. And yet, if film has the ability to do philosophy, to question itself and its limitations and possibilities, and to pose new problems for philosophy, then perhaps film also has the potential to challenge its own imperial and oppressive habits and conditions as well. In a hegemonic context, the interruption of dominant ways of thinking and showing allows for alternative modes of knowledge and imagination, subjectivity and being, to emerge. Christina Sharpe, in her recent study In the Wake, makes a compelling case for what she calls the analytic of “wake work,” a theory and a praxis that turns on the imagination’s ability to imagine otherwise with and against rupture. Alongside Cole’s and Morrison’s important points, in Moten’s and Sharpe’s work we discern a certain interruptive gesture that refuses the work of normative canons and formations of knowledge, an aesthetics and politics of interruption that can both expose the ideological underpinnings and assumptions of institutional conjunctions like film and philosophy and contribute to new possibilities and spaces for (re)arranging subjectivities, communities, and the very legacies and practices of such institutions themselves.

For its 5th edition, the Spiral Film and Philosophy conference wants to bring the potential of interruption to the forefront. It proposes to do so at the confluence of three areas: the epistemological, the political, and the aesthetic. What happens to ideas and forms when the imagination stumbles? What kinds of resistance emerge when traditional representation breaks down? Which modes of belonging do we share when the spectacle is suddenly interrupted? What happens when the dynamics of domination — in aesthetic, formal, durational, spatial, psychological, historical, etc. terms — are rendered inoperative? In the spirit of these questions, we challenge all participants to go above and beyond the common idea according to which it is “easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism.” We contend that cinema and moving images have value, even and especially when they do not work as intended, as programmed, or as expected; when they fail, stutter or stammer; when they confuse their objects, miss their targets, or (suddenly or gradually) fall apart. As such, this call for papers is open to but also extends beyond the experience of cinematic rupture. Spiral welcomes contributions for 20-minute presentations from scholars, artists and practitioners whose work pertains to topics and themes of interruptive and inoperative cinema, but also (and not limited to):

Postcolonial cinema Blackness in moving images Sabotaging the imperial gaze Towards a destituent cinema Camera obscura and ideology Militant cinema and activist cinema Evasive cinema and mass surveillance Images moving beyond the Western canon Decommodification and the movie industry Visibility and invisibility: filming the blind spot Anarchaeological practices and the audio-visual Pictures resisting productivity in neoliberal regimes Indigeneity and visual culture in Canada and elsewhere The subversive value of catastrophic failures in visual media Reclaiming speculative vision in the age of the Anthropocene “Anarranging” film grammars and representational economies Failure in algorithmic cinemas and the value of digital artifacts Breaking the status quo regarding representations of climate crisis The virtues of failure in cinematic experimentation and in visual art Queer and trans approaches to cinema aesthetics, history and politics Afrofuturism and indigenous futurism and the reframing of science-fiction Alternative imaginaries and histories of cinema as reconfigured through radical politics

The confirmed Keynote Speaker is Elizabeth Reich, Assistant Professor, Film & Media Studies, in the Department of English at the University of Pittsburgh. Her research focusses on the intersections of Black Studies, digital media, Afrofuturism, and social movements in historical, global, and transnational contexts. She is author of Militant Visions: Black Soldiers, Internationalism and the Transformation of American Cinema (Rutgers, 2016) and her co-edited collection, Justice in Time: Critical Afrofuturism and the Struggle for Black Freedom, is under contract at University of Minnesota Press. She is also coeditor of “New Approaches to Cinematic Identification,” a special issue of Film Criticism. She is also co-editing another special issue of Film Criticism entitled “Recovery Missions: Black Film Feminisms.” Her next monograph is on time and reparation, and recent essays have appeared in ASAP Journal, Film Criticism, Screen, Post45, ASAP/J, World Records Journal, and African American Review. She is also a contributing editor to ASAP/J and serves on the editorial board of Film Criticism.

The 5th Spiral conference will be held in Toronto, Canada, on Friday, May 8 and Saturday, May 9, 2020.

Please send a 350-word abstract, bibliography (5 references max.), 5 keywords, and biography (with institutional affiliation, if applicable) in ONE DOCUMENT and as an EMAIL ATTACHMENT to by March 1st, 2020. Notifications about acceptance or rejection of proposal will be sent promptly.

Conference Registration Fee: Conference Attendance: $100 (Canadian) Graduate Students and Underemployed: $50 (Canadian)

Conference website: Facebook: @spiralfilmphilosophy

Organized by: The Spiral Collective in collaboration with The Department of Cinema and Media Studies, York University

Artpool 40 – Active Archives and Art Networks International Conference of the Artpool Art Research Center

February 20–21, 2020 Budapest, Museum of Fine Arts, Schickedanz Hall

Speakers: Agustina Andreoletti Zdenka Badovinac David Crowley Katalin Cseh-Varga Mela Dávila-Freire Lina Džuverović-Russell Meghan Forbes Daniel Grúň Péter György Sarah Haylett John Held Roddy Hunter – Judit Bodor Jasna Jakšić – Tihana Puc Klara Kemp-Welch Kaja Kraner Emese Kürti Karolina Majewska-Güde Lívia Páldi Henar Rivière Sven Spieker Kristine Stiles Katalin Timár Tomasz Załuski Elisabeth Zimmermann

Registration (until 17th of February): <> please indicate: • name / • affiliation / • which days you are attending

The international conference celebrates the 40th anniversary of the foundation of Artpool. It aims to map the cultural-political-historical contexts of Artpool’s activity by bringing together scholars and practitioners interested in transnational research on artist archives, progressive curatorial and museological practices, and the historiography of Cold War art scenes and networks.

Detailed information and program:

No empire falls quietly.

For the Roman people conferred the consulship and other great offices of their State on none save those who sought them; which was a good institution at first, because then none sought these offices save those who thought themselves worthy of them,and to be rejected was held disgraceful; so that, to be deemed worthy, all were on their best behaviour. But in a corrupted city this institution grew to be most mischievous. For it was no longer those of greatest worth, but those who had most influence, who sought the magistracies; while all who were without influence, however deserving, refrained through fear. This untoward result was not reached all at once, but like other similar results, by gradual steps. For after subduing Africa and Asia, and reducing nearly the whole of Greece to submission, the Romans became perfectly assured of their freedom, and seemed to themselves no longer to have any enemy whom they had cause to fear. But this security and the weakness of their adversaries led them in conferring the consulship, no longer to look to merit, but only to favour, selecting for the office those who knew best how to pay court to them, not those who knew best how to vanquish their enemies. And afterwards, instead of selecting those who were best liked, they came to select those who had most influence; and in this way, from the imperfection of their institutions, good men came to be wholly excluded.

Machiavelli, Niccolò. Discourses on the First Decade of Titus Livius